GALLINAS WATERSHED THINNING MONITORING
Final Report
Prepared by
Surface Water Quality Bureau
New Mexico Environment Department
June 2010
1
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
2
Acknowledgements
Study Lead: Scott Hopkins
Field Crew
Water Chemistry: Scott Hopkins, Chris Cudia
Biology/Habitat: Seva Joseph
Watershed Protection: Chris Cudia
Report Author: Scott Hopkins
GIS/Map: Bill Skinner
Cover: Gallinas River below the USGS gage at Montezuma, NM
3
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................ 5
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... 6
LIST OF PHOTOS........................................................................................................................... 6
LIST OF ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................... 6
1.0 Executive Summary................................................................................................................... 7
2.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 8
3.0 Water Quality Standards ........................................................................................................ 11
4.0 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 12
5.0 Sampling Summary ................................................................................................................. 13
6.0 Water Quality Assessment ...................................................................................................... 14
6.1 Water Quality Standards Exceedences................................................................................... 14
6.1.1 Physicochemical Data .................................................................................................. 15
6.1.2 Data from Continuous Monitoring Devices.................................................................... 15
6.1.3 Macroinvertebrate Data................................................................................................. 19
6.1.4 Physical Habitat............................................................................................................ 20
7.0 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 23
8.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 26
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of water quality assessment from the 2010 Integrated List (NMED/SWQB,
2010).............................................................................................................................................. 12
Table 2. Approved TMDLs for the Gallinas Watershed. .............................................................. 12
Table 3. Survey Stations and STORET Codes............................................................................ 13
Table 4. Sampling Summary......................................................................................................... 14
Table 5. Summary of Thermograph Data. ................................................................................... 16
Table 6a. Summary of pH Data Collected from Sondes.............................................................. 17
Table 6b. Summary of DO Data Collected from Sondes............................................................. 18
Table 7. Biological Integrity Attainment Matrix using M-SCI1 for AZ/NM Mountain Sites ........... 19
Table 8. Macroinvertebrate evaluations for the Gallinas River and El Porvenir Creek watersheds
....................................................................................................................................................... 20
Table 9. Watershed Characteristics of Reference and Study Sites............................................. 20
Table 10. Substrate Composition Data from the Gallinas River .................................................. 21
Table 11. Geomorphic Data for the Gallinas River ...................................................................... 22
Table 12. Riparian Cover and Qualitative Scores for the Gallinas River ..................................... 22
5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Map of Study Area.......................................................................................................... 9
Figure 2. Mean monthly discharge of the Gallinas River in cfs (cubic feet per second). The
graph compares the long-term historical average with values from water years 2007, 2008 and
2009. Data are from USGS Gage 08380500, Gallinas Creek near Montezuma, NM.................. 10
Figure 3. Comparison of water temperature in the Gallinas River above and below Burro Creek.
....................................................................................................................................................... 24
LIST OF PHOTOS
Photo 1. Thinned ponderosa forest above the Gallinas River...................................................... 10
Photo 2. Thinning adjacent to the riparian. A number of spruce trees in this area have apparently
drowned, possibly due to rising ground water from downstream beaver activity.......................... 11
LIST OF ACRONYMS
AP
C
cfs
CWA
CWAL
ELS
DO
GIS
HQCWAL
NMAC
NMED
OLS
QAPP
SoC
STORET
SWQB
USEPA
USGS
WQS
WUI
Assessment Protocol
Celsius
cubic feet per second
Clean Water Act
Coldwater Aquatic Life
Early Life Stage
Dissolved Oxygen
Geographic Information Systems
High Quality Cold Water Aquatic Life
New Mexico Administrative Code
New Mexico Environment Department
Other Life Stage
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Species of Concern
EPA’s Storage and Retrieval System
Surface Water Quality Bureau
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Geological Survey
Water Quality Standards
Wildland – Urban Interface
6
1.0 Executive Summary
The Gallinas River watershed, located near Las Vegas New Mexico, is currently the
focus of a wildland/urban interface (WUI) forest thinning project undertaken by the Santa
Fe National Forest and the City of Las Vegas. During 2007 the Monitoring and
Assessment Section of the Surface Water Quality Bureau of the New Mexico
Environment Department conducted a water quality and biological assessment survey
designed to capture the impacts, if any, of thinning activities in the watershed. This effort
was continued in 2008 and 2009 in anticipation of forest thinning activities.
Initially four study sites were established; three stations on the Gallinas River proper and
one station on El Porvenir Creek. In 2008 two additional stations were added: Gallinas
River at forest boundary and El Porvenir Creek at Christian Camp. Both are stations used
during past SWQB water quality surveys, allowing comparison of past and present data.
Both also provide separation of federal and private land uses. Sampling at stream
stations was conducted on a monthly basis from May through September during 2007.
Sampling was reduced to five events in 2008 due to SWQB resource limitations. During
2009 sampling was further reduced to three events due to an apparent lack of significant
forest thinning activity in the watershed. Water chemistry sampling at survey stations
included total nutrients, and major anions and cations. Temperature was monitored by
six water-deployed and four air-deployed recording thermographs. In addition, biological
and geomorphological assessments were conducted at selected stations. All sampling
methods were in accordance with the Standard Operating Procedures for Data collection
(NMED, 2007a) Quality Assurance Project Plan for Water Quality Management
Programs (NMED, 2007b, 2008 and 2009a).
Examination of chemical, biological and hydrological data over the course of three years
found no indications of damage to water quality in either the Gallinas River or El
Porvenir Creek as a result of this watershed rehabilitation project. Those parameters that
were seen to exceed criteria, temperature and turbidity, are known to have been problems
prior to the start of forest thinning projects.
This project was funded by a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
7
2.0 Introduction
The Gallinas watershed affords a relatively cool summer climate and snowy winter
conditions supporting activities such as hiking, mountain biking, camping, fishing, and
hunting as well as cross country skiing and other winter sports. Ranching and irrigated
agriculture are additional water uses and contributors to the local economies. The City of
Las Vegas, NM, relies heavily on the Gallinas River for its drinking water supply.
Due to the risk of wildfire, the City of Las Vegas and the Santa Fe National Forest, Pecos
/ Las Vegas Ranger District, have embarked on programs of forest rehabilitation. These
projects involve extensive programs of thinning, burning and logging which have the
potential to impact water quality. In an effort to monitor these impacts, if any, the
Surface Water Quality Bureau (SWQB) of the New Mexico Environment Department
(NMED) has undertaken a multiyear effort to assess the condition of the Gallinas River
within and below the treatment areas.
The upper Gallinas watershed (US Geological Survey [USGS] Hydrologic Unit Code
13060001) is located in San Miguel County, NM on the east slopes of the Sangre de
Christo Mountains (Figure 1).
The upper Gallinas watershed encompasses
approximately 84 square miles (218 km2). The Gallinas River originates at about 9800 ft
(or ~3,000 m) on the southeast slopes of Elk Mountain. The upper Gallinas watershed
includes three smaller, perennial, sub-watersheds, Burro, Trout Springs and El Porvenir
Creeks. The Burro and El Porvenir sub-watersheds join the Gallinas from the northwest
and are planned receive varying degrees of treatment as part of the overall thinning
project. Trout Springs joins the Gallinas on private land from the south just below the
village of Gallinas. Flows (stream discharge) of the Gallinas River during the survey
period are derived from USGS gage number 08380500 (Gallinas Creek near Montezuma,
NM), and are graphically represented and compared to long-term mean flows in Figure
2, below.
The upper Gallinas watershed is contained within the Southern Rockies Level III
Ecoregion 21; it contains the following Level IV Ecoregions: 21b-Crystalline Subalpine
Forests, 21c-Crystalline Mid-Elevation Forests, 21e-Sedimentary Subalpine Forests and
21f-Sedimentary Mid-Elevation Forests (Griffith, G.E. et al., 2006). Several species
within this watershed are listed as threatened or endangered by State or Federal agencies,
or identified as species of concern by non-governmental conservation groups.
8
Figure 1. Map of Study Area
9
Photo 1. Thinned ponderosa forest above the Gallinas River.
Figure 2. Mean monthly discharge of the Gallinas River in cfs (cubic feet per
second). The graph compares the long-term historical average with values from
water years 2007, 2008 and 2009. Data are from USGS Gage 08380500,
Gallinas Creek near Montezuma, NM.
10
Photo 2. Thinning adjacent to the riparian. A number of spruce trees in this
area have apparently drowned, possibly due to rising ground water from
downstream beaver activity.
3.0 Water Quality Standards
The water quality standards for the upper Gallinas watershed fall within segment
20.6.4.215 NMAC (NMAC, 2007). For this segment, the WQS state:
20.6.4.215 PECOS RIVER BASIN - Perennial reaches of the Gallinas river and all
its tributaries above the diversion for the Las Vegas municipal reservoir and
perennial reaches of Tecolote creek and its perennial tributaries.
A. Designated Uses: domestic water supply, high quality coldwater aquatic life,
irrigation, livestock watering, wildlife habitat, municipal and industrial water supply and
secondary contact.
B. Criteria:
(1) In any single sample: specific conductance 300 μmhos/cm or less except specific
conductance 450 μmhos/cm or less in Wright Canyon creek, pH within the range of 6.6 to
8.8 and temperature 20°C (68°F) or less. The use-specific numeric criteria set forth in
11
20.6.4.900 NMAC are applicable to the designated uses listed above in Subsection A of
this section.
(2) The monthly geometric mean of E. coli bacteria 126 cfu/100 mL or less; single
sample 235 cfu/100 mL or less (see Subsection B of 20.6.4.14 NMAC).
[20.6.4.215 NMAC - Rp 20 NMAC 6.1.2212, 10-12-00; A, 05-23-05]
A summary of the current status of support or non-support of the designated uses for this
watershed is provided in Table 1. Presently the only approved TMDL within the
Gallinas River watershed is for temperature (Table 2). The TMDL may be found at:
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/SWQB/Pecos/Upper/index.html
Table 1. Summary of water quality assessment from the 2010 Integrated List
(NMED/SWQB, 2010)
Livestock Watering
Municipal Water
Supply
Secondary Contact
Wildlife Habitat
Gallinas River (Las Vegas
FS NS
Diversion to SFNF boundary)
Gallinas River (SFNF boundary to
FS FS
headwaters)
Porvenir Creek (Gallinas River to
FS NS
SFNF boundary)
Porvenir Creek (SFNF boundary to
NA NA
headwaters)
FS: Full Support; NS: Non-Support; NA: Not Assessed.
Irrigation
H Q Cold Water
Aquatic Life
Domestic Water
Supply
Assessment Unit
FS
FS
FS
NA
FS
FS
FS
NA
NA
FS
FS
FS
FS
NA
FS
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Table 2. Approved TMDLs for the Gallinas Watershed.
Waterbody
Watershed
Pollutant TMDL
Gallinas
River
Pecos
Headwaters
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/SWQB/Pecos/Upper/index.html
Temperature
4.0 Methods
All water quality sampling, benthic macroinvertebrate collection, riparian habitat
analysis, and fluvial geomorphologic measurements were in accordance with relevant
portions of the SWQB’s Quality Assurance Project Plan for Water Quality Management
Programs (QAPP) (NMED/SWQB, 2007b, 2008, 2009a) and Standard Operating
Procedures for Data Collection (NMED/SWQB, 2007a). The macroinvertebrate and
habitat methods employed are the same as the USEPA's Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment Program (Peck et al., 2003).
12
5.0 Sampling Summary
In 2007 samples were collected at four stations, three on the Gallinas and one on El
Porvenir in 2007 (stations 1, 2, 5 and 6). During 2008 and 2009, samples were collected
at six sampling sites during the survey period, four stations on the Gallinas River and two
stations on El Porvenir Creek. The STORET identification codes and location
descriptions of sampling stations selected for this survey are provided in Table 3.
Sampling at stream stations was conducted on a monthly basis from May through
September in 2007, in May, June, July and October in 2008, and seasonally (spring,
summer and fall) in 2009. The start of sampling was delayed until May by snow in the
upper watershed.
Table 3. Survey Stations and STORET Codes
SITE
#
STATION
1
GALLINAS
RIVER AT THE
END OF
FOREST
ROUTE 263
2
Gallinas River
below Burro
Creek
3
Gallinas @ NF
boundary
4
El Porvenir @
Christian Camp
5
El Porvenir
Creek at HWY
65 above the
Gallinas
6
Gallinas River
at Montezuma,
USGS Gage
08380500
LATITUDE
35.722139
35.716600
35° 41.905
35° 42.649
35.690000
35.651944
LONGITUDE
-105.497333
-105.487400
-105°25.094
-105°24.854
-105.375833
-105.318333
STORET_ID
RATIONALE
50Gallin141.9
Upstream reference.
Below uppermost
area of treatment
50Gallin140.8
Burro Cr. (No
Access) will receive
extensive treatment.
Station monitors
potential impacts.
50Gallin131.8
Provides comparison
between USFS and
private lands.
50ElPorv004.8
Upstream reference.
Provides comparison
between USFS and
private lands
50ElPorv000.1
Subject to treatment
on Forest Service
lands and logging on
private land.
50Gallin119.7
Monitors water quality
immediately above
the Las Vegas
municipal diversion.
A listing of parameter suites sampled at each station in the various assessment units can
be found in Table 4. The number of times each parameter (or suite of parameters) was
sampled is indicated. Field data include temperature, specific conductance, pH, dissolved
oxygen, and turbidity. In the case of stream discharge, some of the data may be estimated
13
or calculated. Due to the volume of data collected during this survey, it will not be
included in this report. Those persons requiring a complete dataset or data from a specific
site should contact the Surface Water Quality Bureau or search EPA’s STORET database
at: http://www.epa.gov/STORET.
Table 4. Sampling Summary.
13
13
7
x x* 13
x x 13
x* 7
1
13
13
x x* 13
2
7
7
x
13
13
x x* 13
Field Data
EMAP
13
13
7
Sonde Deployment
Discharge
Thermograph
Macroinvertebrates
Nutrients
Gallinas River (SFNF Boundary to Headwaters)
GALLINAS RIVER AT THE END OF FOREST ROUTE 263
Gallinas River below Burro Creek
Gallinas @ NF bnd
Gallinas River (Las Vegas Diversion to SFNF Boundary)
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage 08380500 El Porvenir Cr (SFNF boundary to headwaters)
El Porvenir @ Christian Camp
El Porvenir Cr (Gallinas R. to SFNF boundary)
El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the Gallinas* Water plus air thermographs.
Ions
Assessment Units / Stations
13
13
7
x
7
13
7
1
x
13
6.0 Water Quality Assessment
6.1 Water Quality Standards Exceedences
The following discussion includes information pertaining to all exceedences of water
quality standards (NMAC, 2007) found during the watershed survey. The purpose of this
section is to provide the reader with information on where within the watershed current
water quality standards are not being met. For many water quality parameters, the State
of New Mexico has adopted numeric water quality criteria. However, for some
parameters (e.g., plant nutrients, stream bottom deposits) only narrative standards exist.
Water quality criteria exceedences are evaluated to determine if the waterbody is
impaired, that is to say, not-supporting its designated use. It should be noted that a single
sample that exceeds a given criterion may or may not generate a violation of standards,
triggering an impairment listing. In New Mexico, surface water data are assessed for
designated use attainment status for both numeric and narrative water quality standards
according to the SWQB Assessment Protocol (AP) (NMED/SWQB 2009). The purpose
of the AP is to detail the decision process that the SWQB employs to determine whether
or not designated uses are being attained in surface waters of the state. Thus, the AP
covers the decision making process for both listing and de-listing. The AP is an evolving
14
document and the current protocol may vary from the procedures in place at the time
these assessments were performed.
Final assessment determinations depend on the overall amount and type of data available
during the assessment process (Refer to the Assessment Protocol NMED/SWQB, 2009)
for additional information on the assessment process). When available, outside sources of
data that meet quality assurance requirements are combined with data collected by
SWQB during watershed surveys to determine final impairment status. Final designated
use impairment status is housed in the Assessment Database (ADB) and is reported in the
biennial State of New Mexico Integrated Clean Water Act §303(d)/ §305(b) Report
(“Integrated Report”) (NMED/SWQB 2010).
6.1.1 Physicochemical Data
Physicochemical water quality samples and sampling frequencies are provided in Table
3. When a survey is completed, all data are checked against Quality Assurance/Quality
Control (QA/QC) measures identified in the QAPP before assessing to determine if
designated uses are being met.
Extensive sampling for major ions, nutrients, and field parameters (temperature,
dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity and specific conductance) found exceedences of only the
HQCWAL temperature criterion (20° C) at stations Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS
Gage 08380500 and El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the Gallinas. These exceedences of
criteria associated with the high quality aquatic life designated use are consistent with the
historical finding of non-support of that use in these assessment units. There were no
exceedences of any kind on Santa Fe National Forest lands. Details are discussed in
section 7.0.
6.1.2 Data from Continuous Monitoring Devices
Large data sets generated from continuous monitoring devices attached to data loggers
(e.g., sondes and thermographs) are assessed according to protocols developed
specifically for such datasets. This is because, unlike grab sample data, it is not
reasonable to list as not supporting on the basis of one or a few exceedences out of
several hundred or thousand data points. The pH and temperature assessment protocols
are tied to the criteria in the State of New Mexico Standards for Interstate and Intrastate
Surface Waters (NMAC, 2007). Dissolved oxygen assessment criteria are linked to
season (i.e., if early life stages of fish are likely present) and designated use (coldwater or
warmwater aquatic life use). Further details of large data set assessment procedures are
available in the appendices of the Assessment Protocol. (NMED/SWQB 2009)
Temperature data loggers (thermographs) were deployed at four stations in the upper
Gallinas watershed in 2007 and six stations in 2008 and 2009. Additionally, four
15
thermographs were deployed in the air to determine the effect of air temperature on water
temperature. The thermographs were programmed to record hourly. The water
thermograph at station El Porvenir @ Christian Camp and the air thermograph at station
Gallinas @ NF bnd were stolen in 2009. Table 5 summarizes these datasets. In addition,
a single multi-parameter data logger (sonde) was deployed at station Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS Gage 08380500 in 2007 and two more at stations Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS Gage 08380500 and El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the
Gallinas in 2009 to evaluate pH and DO. Tables 6a and 6b summarize these data.
Table 5. Summary of Thermograph Data.
Assessment Unit /
Station Name
Data
Collection
Interval
WQS
Temperature
Criterion
(°C)
Gallinas River (SFNF
Boundary to Headwaters)
GALLINAS RIVER AT THE
END OF FOREST ROUTE
263
2007
07/03/2007 –
11/01/2007
≤ 20
15.915
2014
0 / 0%
2008
06/19/2008 –
9/18/2008
≤ 20
14.697
2185
0 / 0%
2009
06/19/2009 –
10/9/200
≤ 20
17.106
2688
0 / 0%
Gallinas River (SFNF
Boundary to Headwaters)
Gallinas R. below Burro
Creek
2007
07/03/2007 –
11/01/2007
≤ 20
19.508
2015
0 / 0%
2008
06/19/2008 –
9/18/2008
≤ 20
17.748
2185
0 / 0%
2009
06/19/2009 –
10/9/2009
≤ 20
19.651
2687
0 / 0%
06/19/2008 –
9/18/2008
≤ 20
19.674
2184
0 / 0%
2009
06/19/2009 –
10/9/2009
≤ 20
22.058
10754
95 / 0.9%
Gallinas River (Las Vegas
Diversion to SFNF
Boundary)
Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500
2007
07/03/2007 –
11/01/2007
≤ 20
26.207
2927
16 / 0.6%
Gallinas River (SFNF
Boundary to Headwaters)
Gallinas @ NF bnd 2008
16
Maximum
Total #
Recorded
of Data
Temperatu
Points
(°C)
# / % of
Exceedences
Table 5. Summary of Thermograph Data, cont.
Assessment Unit /
Station Name
Data
Collection
Interval
WQS
Temperature
Criterion
(°C)
Maximum
Recorded
Temperature
(°C)
Total #
of Data
Points
# / % of
Exceedences
Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500
2008
06/19/2008 –
9/18/2008
≤ 20
23.833
2333
160 / 6.9%
2009
06/19/2009 –
10/9/200
≤ 20
25.744
2691
426 / 15.86%
06/19/2008 –
9/18/2008
≤ 20
19.008
2183
0 / 0%
El Porvenir Cr.
(Gallinas R. to SFNF
boundary) / El Porvenir
Creek at HWY 65 above
the Gallinas
2007
07/03/2007 –
11/01/2007
≤ 20
24.581
2014
10 / 0.5%
2008
06/19/2008 –
9/18/2008
≤ 20
23.761
2184
84 / 3.85%
2009
06/19/2009 –
10/9/200
≤ 20
24.146
2689
158 / 5.88%
El Porvenir Cr. (SFNF
boundary to
headwaters) /
El Porvenir Cr. @
Christian Camp 2008
Assessment Unit
Station Name
Designated Use
Criterion SU
Deployment Dates
Min/Max SU
Number/%
Exceedences
Magnitude Violation
Frequency Violation
Table 6a. Summary of pH Data Collected from Sondes.
Gallinas River (Las Vegas
Diversion to SFNF
Boundary) / Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500
2007
HQCW
AL
6.6 –
8.8
8/16 –
8/23
8.23
–
8.90
0/0
0
0
17
Table 6a. Summary of pH Data Collected from Sondes, cont.
Criterion SU
Deployment Dates
Min/Max SU
Number/%
Exceedences
Magnitude Violation
Frequency Violation
Gallinas River (Las Vegas
Diversion to SFNF
Boundary) / Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500
2009
El Porvenir Cr (Gallinas R.
to SFNF Boundary)
El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65
above the Gallinas
2009
Designated Use
Assessment Unit
Station Name
HQCW
AL
6.6 –
8.8
9/2 –
9/9
7.89
– 8.4
0/0
0
0
HQCW
AL
6.6 –
8.8
9/2 –
9/9
7.96
–
8.61
0/0
0
0
Table 6b. Summary of DO Data Collected from Sondes.
WQS Criterion
(mg/L)
Deployment Dates
Min/Max Conc.
(mg/L)
Min Sat.
(% local)
Combined
Conc./Sat.
Exceedences
(# / % / >3 hrs)
% Sat Exceedences
(# / % / >3 hrs)
Gallinas River (Las
Vegas Diversion to
SFNF Boundary ) /
Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS
Gage 08380500
2007
Gallinas River (Las
Vegas Diversion to
SFNF Boundary) /
Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS
Gage 08380500 2009
El Porvenir Cr
(Gallinas R to SFNF
Boundary)
El Porvenir Creek at
HWY 65 above the
Gallinas
2009
Designated Use
Assessment Unit
Station Name
HQC
WAL
 6.0
8/16 –
8/23
7.18 /
9.44
103.2%
0/0/0
0/0/0
HQC
WAL
 6.0
9/2 –
9/9
6.99
–
9.31
93.6%
0/0/0
0/0/0
HQC
WAL
 6.0
9/2 –
9/9
7.29
–
9.56
96.4%
0/0/0
0/0/0
18
6.1.3 Macroinvertebrate Data
The macroinvertebrate community is generally the first to show a response to certain
stressors such as the fine sediment that settles to the bottom of the channel. By collecting
data on the macroinvertebrate communities that are present in a stream reach SWQB can
identify changes that indicate stress on the community. Depending on the ecoregion of
the study site, this can be done by utilizing either the Rapid Bioassessment Protocol
(RBP) or Mountain Stream Condition Index (M-SCI) as described in SWQB’s main
assessment protocol. Application of the biological assessment or degree of impairment is
a percentage comparison of the sum of selected metric scores at the study site compared
to a reference site or condition. For example, when the macroinvertebrate community at a
study site in ecoregion 23 (AZ/NM Mountains) has an M-SCI score less than 56.70% of
the reference condition, it can be concluded that there is stress on that community and it
would be deemed impaired (i.e. non-support) (Table 7).
Table 7. Biological Integrity Attainment Matrix using M-SCI1 for AZ/NM
Mountain Sites
Biological Condition Category2
1.
2.
> 78.36%
Very Good (Full Support)
78.35 – 56.70%
Good (Full Support)
56.69 – 37.20%
Fair (Non-Support)
37.19 – 18.90%
Poor (Non-Support)
< 18.89%
Very Poor (Non-Support)
M-SCI Index and percentages based on Jacobi, et al. (2006)
New Mexico has combined the “very good” and “good” categories into “Full
Support,” while the remaining categories define “Non-Support.”
Macroinvertebrate and were collected at 3 sites during the course of this study and one
addition site in the watershed in 2004. Three out of the four study sites had biological
assessment scores in the “very good” to “good” range whereas one site was in the “fair”
range indicating the biological community in that reach is stressed.(Table 8).
19
Table 8. Macroinvertebrate evaluations for the Gallinas River and El Porvenir
Creek watersheds
Collection
Biological
Stations
Date
Index Score
Gallinas River below Burro Creek
15 Aug 2007
70.08*
Gallinas @ NF boundary
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500
El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the
Gallinas
27 Sept 2004
84.29*
1 Sept 2009
67.66*
2 Sept 2009
52.51*
* Mountain – Stream Condition Index (M-SCI) is used to assess AZ/NM Mountain sites.
+ Raw percent values of ≤20% fines at a study site should be evaluated as “Full Support.”
FS = Fully Supporting
6.1.4 Physical Habitat
It is essential to characterize the physical habitat in order to relate stream biological
condition to land use impacts and potential anthropogenic disturbances. The physical
habitat components most directly impacting aquatic communities are the stream
geomorphology (physical structure), the riparian corridor that supports and protects
aquatic life, and the composition of the substrate where the aquatic communities live.
Streams existing in similar landscapes express similar compositions of these three
attributes and can be compared to a reference site within that group. A reference site is a
stream reach that has been exposed to the least amount of human disturbance within a
certain landscape.
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP; Peck et al. 2006) surveys
were conducted to collect data for sedimentation/siltation impairment determinations.
Table 9 describes the watershed size, elevation, and ecoregion of each station where an
EMAP survey was conducted. These are the minimal data necessary to categorize the
sites by landscape.
Table 9. Watershed Characteristics of Study Sites
Watershed
Area in km2
(mi2)
Elevation
in meters
(feet)
Omernick Ecoregion
Gallinas River below Burro Creek
36
(14)
2564
(8412)
Southern Rockies
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500
197
(76)
2132
(6995)
Southern Rockies
El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the
Gallinas
67
(26)
2216
(7270)
Southern Rockies
Station Name
20
Substrate Composition
The size of sediment within a stream system is one of the most important physical
attributes in determining the health of aquatic communities. There are two components
to sediment load that impact aquatic life: suspended load and bed load. Suspended load
is quantified through the measurement of turbidity and total suspended solids. Bed load
describes the particles that settle to or roll along the bottom (saltation) of the channel.
Larger bed load particles provide increased interstitial space between particles, thus
allowing for different aquatic communities than those found among small particles with
little or no space. The size of sediment within a stream has a natural progression from
course, large particles in sections at high elevation with smaller watershed size gradually
decreasing to sand in low elevation streams with large watersheds. Therefore, to
determine whether a stream exhibits an unnaturally fine bed load, knowledge of the
location of the stream segment within the watershed is necessary. Particles smaller than
2 millimeters are considered “fines”, and “percent fines” are considered for assessment of
New Mexico’s narrative sediment standard (see 20.6.4.13(A) NMAC). Percent fines is
calculated by adding the % sand and % silt-clay fractions (Table 10). Other metrics in
Table 10 describe the size classes found in the reach, the size of the median of the
cumulative frequency distribution (D50), and the mean embeddedness, which is how
much of the particles were surrounded by fines.
Table 10. Substrate Composition Data from the Gallinas River
D50
(mm)
D84
(mm)
% Fines
(>2mm)
Mean %
Embeddedness
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500 – 2007
106
211
6%
46
Gallinas River below Burro Creek
40*
566*
20%*
50
Station Name
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500 – 2009
74
161
4%
40
El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the
Gallinas118
256
5%
44
* Data from this site was collected from multiple habitats whereas the other sites were sampled
from only riffles, as such the data from this site should not be directly compared to the other sites
in this study. This site also exhibits a significant number of large boulders which were likely
added to the stream bed through non-fluvial processes (e.g. road construction and mechanical
erosion) and explain the large D84 value.
Geomorphology
Quantitatively identifying the current structure of a stream channel allows for a
determination of the amount and variation of habitat available for aquatic communities.
A natural, undisturbed stream system maintains equilibrium with the amount of water and
sediment that it transports, allowing that system to remain stable. Human impacts may
alter the equilibrium of a stream, causing the stream to actively attempt to restore this
balance. As the stream attempts to restore equilibrium, it may cause damage to the
adjacent riparian habitat or the aquatic communities within the channel. Table 11
21
provides a comparison of the geomorphic parameters collected at the reference reaches
and study reaches during the EMAP surveys.
Riparian Health
The riparian area is the corridor of vegetation surrounding the stream that provides many
beneficial functions to the stream channel. Although there are many benefits to a diverse
and healthy riparian area, the most direct effects are shade, soil stability, and organic
inputs providing food for the aquatic communities. Two qualitative assessments were
performed to provide general information on the health of the habitat and structure of the
stream: the Rapid Geomorphic Assessment (RGA) and the Rapid Habitat Assessment
(RHA). These observational assessments combined with the quantitative canopy
measurements (Table 12) provide an indication of riparian health.
Table 11. Geomorphic Data for the Gallinas River
Slope
(%)
Bankfull
Width
(m)
Bankfull
Height
(m)
WidthDepth
Ratio
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS
Gage 08380500 – 2007
1.55
7.9
0.7
11.6
Gallinas River below Burro Creek
3.62
4.6
0.4
10.4
1.5
7.1
0.4
17.9
1.07
5.7
0.3
19.2
Station Name
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS
Gage 08380500 - 2009
El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the
Gallinas
Table 12. Riparian Cover and Qualitative Scores for the Gallinas River
Riparian
Canopy
Cover
(% cover)
RGA1
Stability
Score
(0-36)
RHA2
Habitat
Score
(0-200)
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500 - 2007
50
n/a
181
Gallinas River below Burro Creek
72
n/a/
187
58
3
171
88
2
153
Station Name
Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage
08380500 - 2009
El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the
Gallinas
1. The Rapid Geomorphic Assessment is used to identify stable reaches and the
destabilizing processes that are active in the reach. A channel stability score is
determined by observing a number of channel characteristics and the stage of channel
evolution based on the National Sedimentation Lab empirical model (Simon 1989).
Lower scores indicate a more stable channel.
2. The Rapid Habitat Assessment (Barbour, et al. 1999) provides a qualitative aquatic
habitat score that is based primarily on observation of the quality and diversity of in
stream habitats. Higher scores indicate better habitat quality.
22
7.0 Discussion
As noted above, extensive sampling for major ions, nutrients, biological indicators
(aquatic invertebrates, and algae/periphyton) and field parameters found exceedences
only for temperature and turbidity (discussed below). Elevated water temperature not
only stresses aquatic communities directly by decreasing dissolved oxygen concentration
in the water but indirectly by increasing the metabolic rates of fish, particularly
salmonids, thereby increasing food and oxygen requirements.
Stations El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65 above the Gallinas and Gallinas River at
Montezuma, USGS Gage 08380500 consistently exceeded the temperature criterion.
This finding is consistent with historical data and a previous assessment of non-support
of the high quality cold water aquatic life designated use due to elevated temperature
(Hopkins, 2004). A TMDL for temperature was approved by EPA for these assessment
units in September of 2005 (see Table 4). Assessment of temperature data from 2007 and
2008 resulted in the Assessment Units for the Gallinas River and El Porvenir Creek being
split at the Santa Fe National Forest boundary to reflect the lack of temperature
exceedences on Forest lands (NMED/SWQB 2010).
While neither station Gallinas River at end of Forest Road 263 or Gallinas River below
Burro Creek exceeded the HQCWAL temperature criterion of 20˚ C, a noticeable and
consistent increase in temperature was observed below Burro Creek (Figure 3). These
stations are only 1.5 miles apart. This increase was 2.10˚ C or 14.75% of the average
temperature and 3.59˚ C or 22.60% of the maximum temperature). This increase in
temperature is, probably, due to the fact that Burro Creek and the Gallinas River above
their confluence both pass through a series of small, shallow impoundments (including
those related to a beaver colony on the Gallinas) where long retention times and a lack of
shade allows for increased solar heating. The diurnal swing in water temperature from
coldest (early morning) to warmest (mid afternoon) at the two stations demonstrates the
sensitivity of streams to inputs of solar energy. Excessive thinning of riparian areas
could trigger temperature exceedences that would impair the aquatic life use. Reestablishment of woody riparian vegetation in areas where it has been removed and
implementation of measures to lower the width / depth ratio, narrowing and deepening
the channel, would improve the temperature regime in both watersheds.
23
20
19
18
17
16
Temperature (C)
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
Gallinas abv Burro
6
Gallinas blw Burro
25
-S
ep
15
-S
ep
1S
ep
15
-A
ug
1A
ug
15
-J
ul
3Ju
l
5
Date
Figure 3. Comparison of water temperature in the Gallinas River above and
below Burro Creek.
In general, concentrations of selected parameters that were found at concentrations above
the level of detection e.g. total phosphorus (TP), total Kjehldal nitrogen (TKN), total
suspended solids (TSS) and total dissolved solids (TDS), increased in a down stream
direction. There were slight increases of nutrient indicators (TKN and TP) over time
(2007 to 2009). TDS and TSS remained flat or declined slightly over time. All stations
returned a spike in TP on July 17 2008, apparently in response to a precipitation event.
There were two minor detections of ammonia at stations Gallinas River at SFNF
boundary (0.14 mg/l SDL = 0.1 mg/l) and Gallinas River at Montezuma (0.15 mg/l, SDL
= 0.1 mg/l). While these detections were two orders of magnitude below their respective
criteria, the fact that they occurred at these locations given the low nitrate, TP and TKN
and high dissolved oxygen levels is anomalous. In general, ammonia should not be found
under these conditions.
Instantaneous sampling of field parameters found three exceedences of the turbidity
criterion (10 NTU) at station Gallinas River at Montezuma, USGS Gage 08380500 and
one at station El Porvenir Creek at HWY 65. While two exceedences of a criterion can
trigger a listing, examination of macroinvertebrate data collected in 2007 as required by
the Interim Turbidity Assessment Protocol (Appendix H of NMED/SWQB 2009) indicate
Full Support despite these exceedences at Montezuma. Potential sources of turbidity are
numerous, but in the Gallinas watershed unimproved roads, both public and private, and
erosion of unprotected stream banks are the principal causes. Runoff from trails can also
be a factor. Proper implementation of Best Management Practices could alleviate or even
eliminate turbidity issues.
Examination of chemical, biological and hydrological data over the course of three years
found no indications of damage to water quality in either the Gallinas River or El
24
Porvenir Creek as a result of this watershed rehabilitation project. Those parameters that
were seen to exceed criteria, temperature and turbidity, are known to have been problems
prior to the start of forest thinning projects.
25
8.0 REFERENCES
Barbour, M. T., J. Gerritsen, B. D. Snyder, and J. B. Stribling. 1999. Rapid
Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton,
Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish, Second Edition. EPA 841-B-99-002. U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Water; Washington, D. C.
Griffith, G.E. et al., 2006. Ecoregions of New Mexico. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston,
Virginia.
Hopkins, J. Scott, 2004. Water Quality Assessment of the Gallinas River and Tecolote
Creek, 2001. New Mexico Environment Department – Surface Water Quality Bureau.
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/Surveys/UpperPecosPartII-2001.pdf
New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC). 2007. State of New Mexico Standards for
Interstate and Intrastate Streams. 20.6.4. New Mexico Water Quality Control
Commission. August 1. 2007
http://www.nmcpr.state.nm.us/nmac/parts/title20/20.006.0004.pdf
New Mexico Environment Department - Surface Water Quality Bureau (NMED/SWQB).
Quality Assurance Project Plan for Water Quality Management Programs, 2007b
(QAPP). http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/QAPP/index.html
New Mexico Environment Department - Surface Water Quality Bureau (NMED/SWQB).
Quality Assurance Project Plan for Water Quality Management Programs, 2008
(QAPP). http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/QAPP/index.html
New Mexico Environment Department - Surface Water Quality Bureau (NMED/SWQB).
Quality Assurance Project Plan for Water Quality Management Programs, 2009a
(QAPP). http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/QAPP/index.html
New Mexico Environment Department - Surface Water Quality Bureau (NMED/SWQB).
2007a. Standard Operating Procedures for Data collection. Santa Fe, NM.
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/sop/index.html
New Mexico Environment Department - Surface Water Quality Bureau (NMED/SWQB).
2009b. 2008-2010 State of New Mexico CWA §303(d)/§305(b) Integrated Report.
Santa
Fe,
NM.
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/303d-305b/20082010/index.html
New Mexico Environment Department - Surface Water Quality Bureau (NMED/SWQB)2010. Procedures for Assessing Use Attainment for the State of New Mexico
Integrated Clean Water Act §303(d) /§305(b) Water Quality Monitoring and
Assessment Report: Assessment Protocol.
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/swqb/protocols/index.html
26